| Message ID | 20200227093544.27723-1-peter.ujfalusi@ti.com |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Commit | f9c23615c688270d2a383bd752f7a54a7137d596 |
| Headers | show |
| Series | ALSA: dmaengine_pcm: No need to take runtime reference twice in pcm_pointer | expand |
diff --git a/sound/core/pcm_dmaengine.c b/sound/core/pcm_dmaengine.c index 6f1507f992d1..4d059ff2b2e4 100644 --- a/sound/core/pcm_dmaengine.c +++ b/sound/core/pcm_dmaengine.c @@ -248,8 +248,6 @@ snd_pcm_uframes_t snd_dmaengine_pcm_pointer(struct snd_pcm_substream *substream) status = dmaengine_tx_status(prtd->dma_chan, prtd->cookie, &state); if (status == DMA_IN_PROGRESS || status == DMA_PAUSED) { - struct snd_pcm_runtime *runtime = substream->runtime; - buf_size = snd_pcm_lib_buffer_bytes(substream); if (state.residue > 0 && state.residue <= buf_size) pos = buf_size - state.residue;
The runtime pointer has been taken in functional level so there is no need to take it again under the if () case. Fixes: 9d789dc047e3 ("ALSA: dmaengine_pcm: Consider DMA cache caused delay in pointer callback") Signed-off-by: Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@ti.com> --- Hi Mark, it looks like that the DMA caused delay reporting patch went in in two pieces: fa1f875c120f ALSA: dmaengine_pcm: Consider DMA cache caused delay in pointer callback 9d789dc047e3 ALSA: dmaengine_pcm: Consider DMA cache caused delay in pointer callback and the second one missed removing the runtime pointer initialization from the if () case. Regards, Peter sound/core/pcm_dmaengine.c | 2 -- 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)